Friday, December 28, 2007

Astros - Signed Erstad for No Particular Reason

Houston Astros - Signed “Baseball Player” Darin Erstad

This is reportedly worth $1 million. If you ignore the fact that Darin Erstad can’t play Major League Baseball, the fact that Ed Wade can’t manage a Major League Baseball team, and money can exchanged for good and services, this is a terrific signing.

I Get Mail!

SYMBORSKY WHAT HAPPENED YOU USE TO BE FUNNY NOW YOUR JUST A PUSSIE

RAPTORS RULE

OK, the Astros have as much chance of seeing October as Pakistan’s government.

Is that mean enough or do I have to make a joke involving, say, Hiroshima survivors?

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Is that projection assuming he's healthy (right...) or hurt? And does it take into account his spectacular "grinder-ness"? Ed Wade is no fool. He knows you win baseball games by sheer willpower and Jedi mind tricks.

I like how Erstad's projection is so bad, it'd only be worth it to the Astros if he paid them a million dollars. Awesome.

That said, I actually expect him to hit his optimistic projection (with a higher batting average, something like .270 or .280) and get a 3 year, $15 million extension. If that's not the worst case scenario, I don't know what is.

Erstad is terrible, but I can't see why the projection would be *that* low. For one, the mean SLG is 40 points below his worst season. A 50 OPS+ is also way worse than anything he has done so far (save a 95 AB season of 57).

I mean, I wouldn't expect anything above 65-70 (and at that level, anything still sucks), but I am curious why he falls so far.

Also, is there a Taguchi projection? I count my blessings that the Phils signed him over Erstad.

Erstad is terrible, but I can't see why the projection would be *that* low. For one, the mean SLG is 40 points below his worst season. A 50 OPS+ is also way worse than anything he has done so far (save a 95 AB season of 57).

he's been pretty terrible the last few years. he posted a 68 last year in 300+ AB, so 50 is not that impossible. zips seems to be conservative in its projections, which i think i would want in a projection system.

chone has erstad at .675 ops, which lines up with the zips optimistic projection.

The following was posted by Walt Davis in the Dontrelle Willis TO, it didn't get a reply but it seemed worthy of one:

"Value" (in whatever terms) is dependent on playing time and, as we all know, ZIPS is not a playing time projection system. Presumably we would use RAR and $ value to more fully discuss whether it was a good signing/trade, but we'd be relying on projected numbers ZIPS isn't designed to produce.

Yeah, which is why I've hesitated about providing these numbers. I've decided to err on the side of providing more stuff and allowing people to consider it how they may, but I'm also considering not doing it after all and going back to the simpler report.

Yeah, which is why I've hesitated about providing these numbers. I've decided to err on the side of providing more stuff and allowing people to consider it how they may, but I'm also considering not doing it after all and going back to the simpler report.

Is there any way you could simply fix the number of PAs for position players? I imagine it would be a lot tougher to do this for pitchers' playing time.

Actually, the estimated production part is pretty well covered in the disclaimer. But, there still seems to be a fence around PT.

I'm starting to wonder if the "ZiPS doesn't project playing time" mantra is akin to the DIPS 1.0 perspective, in that it's not really true anymore (if it ever was), but nobody has really come out and said that.

Hey, defense matters, too. If the man can still play an above-average left field, he could hit like a replacement player and still have value. Of course, I'm not sure the Astros needed another guy like that.

You mean for Erstad, right? That would still be a bad deal for the Astros. I'm sure that Garth Brooks (or some other ridiculously wealthy, self-styled "athlete") would beat that number for a spot on the roster.